dc.description.abstract | The proliferation of hybrid threats challenges both national security and the institutional foundations of governance. Nowhere is this tension more acute than in the maritime domain,where critical infrastructure such as undersea cables, offshore energy platforms, and subsea pipelines have become both economic lifelines and geopolitical fault lines. These infrastructures are increasingly exposed to hybrid operations designed to exploit legal ambiguity, attribution challenges, and the seams between civil, military, and private actors. Traditional security governance models premised on clear jurisdictional boundaries, centralized command structures, and rigid doctrinal templates, struggle to account for weaponized ambiguity and threats operating below thresholds of open conflicts. As sub-threshold threats continue to evolve and be refined, they reveal deep structural limitations in existing institutional responses, including sectoral silos, information-sharing deficits, and accountability systems illsuited for dynamic crisis environments. This paper explores the need for more adaptive governance frameworks capable of managing the uncertainty, complexity, and cross-sectoral interdependence that define today’s hybrid threat landscape. Specifically, it examines how experimentalist governance (EG) offers a promising architecture for coordinating the defense of critical maritime infrastructure (CMI) in the face of hybrid aggression. The paper analyzes two distinct cases: Norway, with its mature institutional capacity, dense subsea infrastructure, and strong integration with NATO and EU partners; and Romania,situated at the Black Sea frontier, where emerging offshore energy projects intersect with a fluid and contested security environment. | |